Timeline for Why are currents named currents?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 12, 2013 at 2:53 | answer | added | maybe | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 11, 2013 at 3:08 | vote | accept | D. Kelleher | ||
| Apr 10, 2013 at 20:18 | answer | added | Peter Kravchuk | timeline score: 7 | |
| Apr 10, 2013 at 19:59 | answer | added | Andrey Rekalo | timeline score: 15 | |
| Apr 10, 2013 at 19:58 | answer | added | Carlo Beenakker | timeline score: 16 | |
| Apr 10, 2013 at 19:24 | history | edited | Charles Matthews | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
sp
|
| Apr 10, 2013 at 19:04 | comment | added | Ryan Budney | Actual electrical currents I suppose are not always along strict submanifolds -- they can be along all kinds of shapes, like in a lightning strike. So it's probably a better match with reality to consider their data as carried in the distributional sense of functionals on forms. I imagine your intuition is correct but I'm not so certain about the specific history. There is likely people on this forum that know the history well but if not I'd suggest asking someone like Cartier or Berger. | |
| Apr 10, 2013 at 18:21 | history | asked | D. Kelleher | CC BY-SA 3.0 |